smitty Posted July 12, 2014 Report Posted July 12, 2014 Man, if we didn't have Global Warming, it would have REALLY gotten cold!! AlGore -- what an idiot!! ROFLMAO!!!! http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/brisbane-hits-coldest-temperature-in-103-years/story-e6frg6n6-1226986116278?nk=9fe3cbf4f5bf37a6dc3f771dfd4654b8 Quote
stevenash Posted July 12, 2014 Report Posted July 12, 2014 Al Gore thinks you should ride a bicycle to work while he flies in his private jet too. 77 1 Quote
TxHoops Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Wow. Please read more than one article on the subject before posting. Your premise is so severely flawed it is entertaining. And shows a SEVERE lack of understanding of global warming. Try again sport! Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote
TxHoops Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Smitty = low information poster! Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote
smitty Posted July 13, 2014 Author Report Posted July 13, 2014 Wow. Please read more than one article on the subject before posting. Your premise is so severely flawed it is entertaining. And shows a SEVERE lack of understanding of global warming. Try again sport! I guess you are an AlGore disciple?! Quote
77 Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 All of the people that preach global warming are the same rich elites that fly jets all over the country! Folks just follow the money trail! Quote
TxHoops Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 I guess you are an AlGore disciple?! I believe in God AND science. Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Give it a little while and it will be global cooling again...and of course, it can only be fixed by fed gov regulation because the earth never cools and warms naturally...it is all man made. ...not sure how we're going to cork a volcano. Quote
stevenash Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Dont forget that we also must find a way to control cow flatulence. A tax on the rich might work. NDNation 1 Quote
EnlightenedChosenOne Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Got that rightSmitty = low information poster! Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote
NorthoftheBorder Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 I believe in God AND science. This is interesting, and it is quite possible to believe both. It is well know that many of the early scientist's were avowed bible believing Christians who did their scientific work to understand God's creation and His natural laws. It would be interesting to understand how you view science and God's word. It is a discussion that is not condusive to numerous posts on this board. But for starters, I am literalist and believe in a 7 day creation period. However the most important aspect is not whether you believe in a seven day period or if it actually took longer than 7 literal days, but that God actively created the universe and has actively worked since the beginning in the lives of his creation. And, even more importantly, that God's MORAL law is absolute and is not invalid no matter what scientific evidence we may find. Holiness is more important to God than scientific knowledge that we may possess. Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Smitty = low information poster! Got that right You two guys make some very strong points...if you disagree, you are simply a low information poster...debate over. Quote
westend1 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 You two guys make some very strong points...if you disagree, you are simply a low information poster...debate over.Pot/Kettle. All that stuff Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Pot/Kettle. All that stuff Show me where I call anyone a low information poster because they have a different opinion than me. Quote
westend1 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Show me where I call anyone a low information poster because they have a different opinion than me.Not you, but show me where you called out anyone else for this low info voter thing. Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Not you, but show me where you called out anyone else for this low info voter thing. Different deal...if you vote for any candidate and know nothing about them, you are a low information voter. If you have a different opinion than me on a subject that you have bothered to research and draw a different conclusion, I may think you are wrong (and you me) but I wouldn't call you a low information poster. smitty 1 Quote
TxHoops Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 This is interesting, and it is quite possible to believe both. It is well know that many of the early scientist's were avowed bible believing Christians who did their scientific work to understand God's creation and His natural laws. It would be interesting to understand how you view science and God's word. It is a discussion that is not condusive to numerous posts on this board. But for starters, I am literalist and believe in a 7 day creation period. However the most important aspect is not whether you believe in a seven day period or if it actually took longer than 7 literal days, but that God actively created the universe and has actively worked since the beginning in the lives of his creation. And, even more importantly, that God's MORAL law is absolute and is not invalid no matter what scientific evidence we may find. Holiness is more important to God than scientific knowledge that we may possess. Although I am not a literalist in the sense that God created the heavens and earth in 7 days, I could not agree with this post more. Ultimately, it does not matter...it is the belief it is God's handiwork that matters. Quote
smitty Posted July 14, 2014 Author Report Posted July 14, 2014 Not you, but show me where you called out anyone else for this low info voter thing. Low Information Voters. No one yet has connected the dots! Still waiting... Quote
smitty Posted July 14, 2014 Author Report Posted July 14, 2014 Show me where I call anyone a low information poster because they have a different opinion than me. Let me agree with LumRaider: Just because someone disagrees with me/us does not necessarily make them a Low Information Voter. All I can say is -- Connect the dots... Quote
stevenash Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 I would classify those who accept bald face lies as reliable information to be low information voters. Not because they arent capable of understanding its a lie but because they believe that the motive behind the lie is ok or because the liar is a nice/likeable person. Hence they do not care to pursue the facts/truth as it may give the "other guy" the upper hand. smitty and NorthoftheBorder 2 Quote
westend1 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Different deal...if you vote for any candidate and know nothing about them, you are a low information voter. If you have a different opinion than me on a subject that you have bothered to research and draw a different conclusion, I may think you are wrong (and you me) but I wouldn't call you a low information poster.Not a different deal. The people who throw that term around no basically nothing about the people they are calling out. You have no real idea how much these people know, or don't know, about the candidates. Frankly, most people don't keep up the the issues and political platforms of all the candidates. By your definition, most people, and that includes Republicans, vote with low information. TxHoops 1 Quote
NorthoftheBorder Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Not a different deal. The people who throw that term around no basically nothing about the people they are calling out. You have no real idea how much these people know, or don't know, about the candidates. Frankly, most people don't keep up the the issues and political platforms of all the candidates. By your definition, most people, and that includes Republicans, vote with low information. I think in a different thread to a question asked by PamFam I said that low information voters reside along the political spectrum (Democrat, Independent and Republican). The question that can't be definatively answered is where is the largest concentration of them!! You would assert that would be in the Republican camp, I assert they are in he Democratic camp. If you can find any INDEPENDENT data that would show the distribution let us know. I do not think any data exists to show as almost assuredly it would have too much subjectivity too it to be reliable. Quote
smitty Posted July 14, 2014 Author Report Posted July 14, 2014 I think in a different thread to a question asked by PamFam I said that low information voters reside along the political spectrum (Democrat, Independent and Republican). The question that can't be definatively answered is where is the largest concentration of them!! You would assert that would be in the Republican camp, I assert they are in he Democratic camp. If you can find any INDEPENDENT data that would show the distribution let us know. I do not think any data exists to show as almost assuredly it would have too much subjectivity too it to be reliable. The election of obama -- a non-qualified, incompetent empty suit is proof that the majority of Low Information Voters resides in the Democratic party. The man-child is in over his head. He can't even secure our borders. And people still support him. Quote
westend1 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 LOL! Yeah. Our borders were completely secure before 2008. Low information? Quote
NorthoftheBorder Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 LOL! Yeah. Our borders were completely secure before 2008. Low information? What is going on now was not happening back then!! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.